No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Royal Suites Health Care & Rehabilitation

214 West Jimmie Leeds Road, Galloway Township, NJ 08205 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 186 certified beds · (609) 748-9900 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (609) 748-9900 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 14 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • about 43% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
76 W Jimmie Leeds Rd Ste 305 · (609) 652-0300 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
54 W Jimmie Leeds Rd · (609) 404-7444 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
ShopRite2.8 mi
401 S Pitney Rd · (609) 404-4160 · Call to confirm hours
Park
184-198 Pomona Rd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased5.2%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.2%4.6%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.1%0.6%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.8%0.8%2.0%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.6%12.1%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.2%2.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened4.0%8.2%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication17.1%18.8%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.3%97.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.8%5.4%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control15.2%15.6%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table9.2%12.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.5%80.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.1%24.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.9%8.1%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.872.071.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.411.111.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

59.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 480 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

59.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
72.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 72.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 225 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 36% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 52% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF59.8%CMS range 54.5–63.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.9%CMS range 8.9–13.310.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge72.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge76.4%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge61.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified85.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge90.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.1%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened3.1%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.8%CMS range 5.5–10.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.171.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.29
RN hours/ resident / day
1.09
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.64
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.03
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.16
RN hoursweekends
37.2%
Total nursing turnover
15.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 186 beds and averages 174.4 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.03 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.29 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.64 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.73 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.15 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.34 to 0.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

7
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-23)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2023-03-08)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to handle potentially hazardous foods and maintain sanitation in a safe and consistent manner designed to prevent food borne illness. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 05/13/2025 from 09:39 to 10:18 AM the surveyor, accompanied by the facility Food Service Director (FSD), observed the following in the kitchen: 1. The surveyor and FSD were in the dairy kitchen. The dairy drying rack adjacent to the dairy manual wash sink had two (2) stacks of dessert plates that were cleaned and sanitized. The dessert plates were not stored in the inverted position or covered. The dessert plates were exposed to contamination. On an adjacent rack, a stack of eight (8) monkey bowls were not stored inverted or covered and were exposed to contamination. Adjacent to the monkey bowls a glass pitcher used to serve beverages was not inverted and was exposed to contamination. The FSD removed the items from the rack to be rewashed and sanitized. 2. A storage rack to…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and review of other pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that appropriate incontinence care was provided to residents who needed assistance for toileting hygiene. This deficient practice was identified for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #23 and Resident #68) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs), and was evidenced by the following: 1.) On 5/19/2025 at 9:33 AM, during the incontinence tour of the memory care unit, the surveyor accompanied by Licensed Practical Nurse/ Unit Manager (LPN/UM) #2, noted a strong malodorous smell of urine from the hallway outside the room of Resident #68 and Resident #23. Upon entering the room, blackish marks were observed on the floor. The surveyor observed Resident #68 awake but not verbally engaging and lying on mattress without bed linen. The LPN/ UM #2 exposed the resident's incontinence brief which was saturated at the back. The surveyor asked the LPN/ UM if the resident would be changed. The LPN/ UM #2 stated that the brief was wet but not soaked. A strong…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Complaint # NJ183027 Based on interview, record review, and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to; a.) consistently follow a physician order for treatment of facility-acquired pressure ulcer, b.) ensure pressure-relieving interventions were consistently implemented for facility-acquired pressure ulcer, and c.) weekly skin assessment was consistently completed. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #288) reviewed for pressure ulcers and was evidenced by the following: A review of the admission Record indicated that Resident #288 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included but not limited to; adult failure to thrive, anorexia (an eating disorder characterized by restricted food intake leading to weight loss) and gastrostomy (G-tube) (a surgically made opening in the stomach for introduction of food) status. A review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool dated 1/17/2025, revealed that Resident #288…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to consistently provide urinary catheter care, as physician ordered for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #98) for urinary catheter. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 05/13/2025 at 10:51 AM during the initial tour of the facility the surveyor observed Resident #98 seated in their wheelchair in their room. Resident #98 was observed to be wearing shorts and had a urinary catheter bag exposed by being attached to upper right thigh. A Privacy cover was observed on the urinary leg bag. According to the admission Record Resident #98 was admitted to the facility with the following but not limited to diagnoses: Spina bifida (a type of neural tube defect that can lead to various health problems including bowel and bladder control), presence of urogenital implants, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infection (an infection caused by a type…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and review of pertinent facility documents, it was determined the facility failed to accurately document the administration of two controlled medications for 1 sampled resident (Resident #338) identified upon inspection of 1 of 4 medication carts (mid-west cart, second floor). The evidence was as follows: On 5/20/25 at 1:22 PM, the surveyor in the presence of the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) inspected the second-floor mid-west medication cart. A review of the narcotics located in the secured and locked narcotic box and reconciled to the controlled drug administration record, a declining inventory sheet, revealed Resident #338's tramadol 50 milligram (mg) tablet, a medication used to relieve pain, did not match. The blister pack contained 29 tablets, and the declining inventory sheet indicated there should be 30 tablets remaining. A further review of the controlled drug administration records revealed Resident #338's alprazolam 0.25 mg tablet, a medication used for anxiety, also did not match. The blister pack contained 10 tablets, and the declining…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-23 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, review of medical record and other pertinent facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to: a.) ensure blood work was obtained in accordance with physician orders for the monitoring of an anticoagulant medication, Warfarin, (a medication used to prevent or treat blood clots in the heart and blood vessels) and insulin medication, Humalog and b.) ensure that high-risk medications categorized as having Narrow Therapeutic Index (NTI) (medication in which the therapeutic dose is close to the toxic dose) were administered in accordance with the physician's orders. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #183) reviewed for medication management and was evidenced by the following: On 5/15/2025 at 8:18 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #183 in bed awake. The resident stated that they were going to have dialysis that morning. On 5/15/2025 at 9:30 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #183's electronic medical records (EMR) which revealed the following: A review of the admission Record revealed that Resident #183 had diagnoses…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, review of medical records, and other facility documents, it was determined that the facility failed to use appropriate infection control practices to prevent the potential spread of infection in accordance with the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines and standards of clinical practice, specifically by a.) failing to follow appropriate disinfection of a shared resident care equipment during medication administration observation, b.) failing to wear protective gown while doing incontinence check with a resident on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), and c.) failing to place a resident with indwelling foley catheter on EBP. This deficient practice was identified for 3 out of 3 unsampled residents during medication administration observation and 2 of 3 residents reviewed for EBP (Resident #110 and Resident #122). The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. On 5/14/2025 at 8:08 AM, during the medication administration observation with Licensed…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-03-08 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespread
    Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and document review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to ensure resident's highest practical wellbeing by failing to: a.) provide incontinence care, b.) provide showers as scheduled, c.) assist resident with activities of daily living, d.) maintain the required minimum direct care staff-to-shift ratios as mandated by the state of New Jersey. 1) During an interview with Surveyor #1 on 3/2/2023 at 9:51 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA #1) stated that staffing is not great now. CNA #1 stated that on average she has 15 residents in her care. CNA #1 added that if there on only 4 aides on the unit, residents will probably not get a shower. During an interview with Surveyor #1 on 3/2/2023 at 11:50 AM, CNA #2 stated that she can have between 10-15 residents in her care during the day and weekends are about the same. During an interview with Surveyor #1 on 3/2/2023 at 11:57 AM, the surveyor Resident # 18 stated that the day…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to handle potentially hazardous foods and maintain sanitation in a safe and consistent manner to prevent food borne illness. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 2/28/2023 from 9:26 AM to 9:46 AM, the surveyor, accompanied by the Food Service Director, observed the following in the kitchen: 1. On a middle rack in the dry storage room an opened bag of pasta was wrapped in plastic wrap. The plastic wrap and the original bag had no open or use by date. The FSD threw the bag of opened pasta in the trash. 2. On a multi-tiered, wheeled can storage rack in the dry storage room, a can of sauerkraut on a lower rack had a significant dent on the upper seam. When shown to the FSD they agreed that the dent was on the seam of the can. The FSD removed the dented can to the designated dented can area. 3. On an upper shelf of the meat walk-in refrigerator a half pan under the…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-03-08 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a.) the residents' were transported from one area of the unit to another area in a dignified manner for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident # 13) and 2 unsampled residents, who were observed to be pulled backwards in the Geri chair and b.) failed to ensure that the residents' dining experience was provided in a manner to promote the dignity and respect of the residents, who were not served their meal at the same time while seated at the same table during dining observations . This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: 1. On 2/28/2023 at 12:10 PM, Surveyor #1 observed an unsampled resident to be pulled backwards in a Geri chair by Unit Manager Licensed Practical Nurse (UM/LPN #1) through the dining room out to the hallway. On 2/28/2023 at 12:15 PM, Surveyor #1 observed a second unsampled resident to be pulled backwards out of the dining room to the hallway in her Geri chair by a unit LPN. On…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-03-08 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to create a homelike environment during dining by not removing food from serving trays. The deficient practice was observed on the third-floor dining room and evidenced by the following: On 2/28/2023 at 11:42 AM, Surveyor #1 began a lunch meal observation in the third-floor dining room with the arrival of the first meal truck. Residents were served their meals on trays. Food was not removed from the trays and placed directly on the table during meal service. On 2/28/2023 at 12:04 PM, the second meal truck arrived to the unit dining room and the residents were served their meals on trays. Food was not removed from the tray and placed directly on the table during meal service. On 2/28/2023 at 12:21 PM, the third meal truck arrived to unit dining room and the residents were served their meals on tray. Food was not removed from the tray and placed directly on the table. On 3/1/2023 at 11:35 AM, lunch meal observation began with the arrival of the first meal truck to the unit dining room. Residents were served…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-03-08 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, record review and review of other facility documentation, it was determined the facility failed to provide necessary care of respiratory equipment consistent with professional standards by a.) not replacing and properly storing a nasal cannula (tube used to deliver oxygen to a person) in accordance with facility policy and b.) not properly storing a nebulizer (small machine that turns liquid medicine into a mist that can be easily inhaled) according to facility policy. The deficient practice was identified for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #145 and #36) reviewed for Oxygen. The deficient practice was evidenced by the following: A.) On 2/28/2023 at 9:55 AM, during the initial tour of the facility, Surveyor #1 observed Resident #145 in bed in his/her room. Surveyor #1 observed an oxygen concentrator (machine that produces oxygen) adjacent to the bed with a nasal cannula connected to it. The nasal cannula was draped over the concentrator. Surveyor #1 observed a piece of tape attached to the nasal cannula revealing the date, 2/5. On 3/1/2023 at 8:42 AM,…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-03-08 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolated
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, and review of other facility records, it was determined that the facility Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to utilize the Facility Performance Improvement Plan to follow the facility process to measure and utilize data acquired for obtaining weights as ordered and develop quantitative and measurable goals, as well as document bi-weekly meeting minutes for the performance improvement project. This deficient practice was evidenced by the following: On 3/8/2023 at 8:59 AM, the surveyors conducted an interview with the Unit Manager/Licensed Practical Nurse (UM/LPN #1) assigned to the 3rd floor of the facility. The surveyors asked UM/LPN #1 if she was familiar with the QAPI for weight discrepancies on the unit. UM/LPN #1 told the surveyors, Yes, I am aware that there is a QAPI for weights. It started with a few residents that had large discrepancies in weights. It was between me and the dietitian. The dietitian brought it to the Director of Nursing's (DON) attention, and we investigated a bit further to 1.) See how they were being…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review and review of other facility documentation, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that visitors and contracted agents who provided services to residents were familiar and adhered to infection practice guidelines according to the facility's policy and Center for Disease Control (CDC). This deficient practice was identified as evidenced by the following: On 2/28/2023 at 12:01 PM, the surveyor observed a visitor dressed in street clothes, enter, and exit a resident room that was on isolation for COVID-19 without the required Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). The visitor stated she did not have physical contact with the resident. The surveyor pointed out signage posted on the door that read: STOP!! Special Droplet/Contact Precautions in addition to Standard Precautions; only essential personnel should enter this room. If you have questions, ask nursing staff. Everyone Must: Including visitors, doctors, and staff: clean hands when entering and leaving room. Wear face mask. Wear eye protection (face shield or goggles).…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to OCEAN HEALTHCARE — 11 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.3+1.7 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.9+0.1 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.5-0.5 vs chain
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
ROYAL SUITES CARE CENTER LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/21/2006
FRANKEL, ENASHEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST40%since 01/01/2015
FISHER, YAAKOVIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 06/12/2023

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$23.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-4.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$10.8M
Related-party expense43% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 60%Medicare 20%Other / private 20%

This home reported $10.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 43% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$410per resident / day
operating cost
$12,473per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$393per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in NJ

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the New Jersey Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in New Jersey
$12,775/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$14,448/mo
Nursing home (private)
$8,710/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 315503. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-23, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next